so hdr

[Zorak]

The topic of HDR peeked my interest, so I took this photo with my iphone this afternoon, and I can't decide whether HDR does in fact make for a better photo.

Non HDR:



hdr:



Both versions are untouched. The HDR version is almost exactly what the shot looked like to the eye as it was taken. But, I'm not sure I prefer it.

It got me to thinking; to what extent, or rather, how important, is verisimilitude to a photograph?

 

[FreightTrain]

The HDR shot looks pretty damn sharp to me.

 

[Siphorous]

Imho, beauty is simply in the eye of the beholder. Whatever floats your boat - never mind whatever is floating someone elses boat.

If the picture that lacks that degree of 'truth' is the one you prefer - so what? Enjoy it and share it.

 

[skyblue]

i think it works with some pictures but not others

 

[Dana]

i think they look damn near identical

 

[skyblue]

i think they look damn near identical

look at the bible

 

[Dana]

oh sorry i was concentrating on the ornate ceiling

 

[Zorak]

Imho, beauty is simply in the eye of the beholder. Whatever floats your boat - never mind whatever is floating someone elses boat.

If the picture that lacks that degree of 'truth' is the one you prefer - so what? Enjoy it and share it.

I agree whole heartedly.
But, I still wonder as to what role verisimilitude plays in photography, especially with post-shot touch ups.

i think it works with some pictures but not others

Obviously HDR has major disadvantages with anything moving. Even people can be almost impossible to shoot unless close up and completely still. Outside it works well I think, where the range of colours is greater.

i think they look damn near identical

Really? Maybe it's because I took it, but the lighting and shadows are particularly artificial appearing to me, and the colours are more defined, but less contrasting/noticeable.

 

[Zorak]

look at the bible

:nod:

the back of the chapel is another indication. In person, the cross was a mere gold glint (but that might have been partly due to me not wearing my glasses.)

 

[Dana]

Maybe it's my lap top but besides the bible its hard to tell. I do see what your talking about now with the back though. It's a bit darker and refined in the hdr

 

[Tuffdisc]

Kind of come out good this one, don't like overdone HDRs, too much of an eyesore, but the hdr seem good and not overdone

 

[Guyzerr]

There are two things that jumped out at me right off the bat. The first one is the back of the church is considerably darker in the HDR and I like that because.... to me the shot is the " Bible " on it's stand and without you adding the HDR effect the printing can't be read. Therein is the second thing that jumped out at me. When I scan the rest of the image with these tired old eyes I do notices some areas are sharper than the original, some are a bit brighter and some darker but once again my eyes are drawn to the Bible and to me that's the shot. If it was me that was shooting it I would center myself on the Bible and crouch down so it was smack dab level and in the middle of my lens. Others would have a different opinion but I'm like... so what... it's my shot.

 

[Guyzerr]

As far as verisimilitude is concerned I suppose the shooter would have to ask themselves what the purpose of the shot was? If it's absolute reproduction your interested in then it's important. If you shoot something and want a certain effect that can't be obtained without manipulation then it doesn't matter.

 

[Zorak]

There are two things that jumped out at me right off the bat. The first one is the back of the church is considerably darker in the HDR and I like that because.... to me the shot is the " Bible " on it's stand and without you adding the HDR effect the printing can't be read. Therein is the second thing that jumped out at me. When I scan the rest of the image with these tired old eyes I do notices some areas are sharper than the original, some are a bit brighter and some darker but once again my eyes are drawn to the Bible and to me that's the shot. If it was me that was shooting it I would center myself on the Bible and crouch down so it was smack dab level and in the middle of my lens. Others would have a different opinion but I'm like... so what... it's my shot.

In hindsight I would have done the same, but the shot was completely spontaneous. I only went into the chapel because my friend's father had wanted a shot of it for himself.
I had up to that point amused myself by playing the piano and writing in the prayer request book.

 

[Guyzerr]

In hindsight I would have done the same, but the shot was completely spontaneous. I only went into the chapel because my friend's father had wanted a shot of it for himself.
I had up to that point amused myself by playing the piano and writing in the prayer request book.

I understand how sperm of the moment stuff kinda takes hold but now that you have some feedback are you going to go back and shoot it again just for shits and giggles? I know it would drive me nuts if I didn't.

 

[Zorak]

I understand how sperm of the moment stuff kinda takes hold but now that you have some feedback are you going to go back and shoot it again just for shits and giggles? I know it would drive me nuts if I didn't.

Maybe on wednesday, there's also a picture gallery which might be worth a shot too (I lived above it and this chapel for a whole year and neglected to visit either), and I can give that one more thought.

 

[JoeCool10]

The HDR pic is a little darker, sharper and more realistic, as if I were there. In the second shot, there is no glare from the sun, you can see out the windows, as Guy said, the print on the bible is visible and the lighting on either side of the cathedral is not blurred. IMO, it looks GREAT! Good job on this Zorak.